Secretary Clinton on LGBT Rights in Geneva

[OrphanPip]

It's an interesting development certainly. Most of the anti-sodomy laws on the books in Africa were introduced by European colonialism. The devil's advocate in me sees this as problematic because of the issue of cultural imperialism, and the use of wealth to leverage the moral conscience of a nation isn't likely to produce any positive results. It's not like blackmailing the Ugandan government will do much to help the situation of gays and lesbians in the country. They are more likely to suffer from a number of less directly state sponsored forms of oppression.

That letter is just the opinion of some ex gays...the effort in Uganada most certainly has US Political Ties...you can start with "THE FAMILY" and go from there...

[Only registered members can see links. ]

I have followed this from the beginning...way before they proposed the legislation. I can tell you that a handful of Conservative Republican Politicians...member of THE FAMILY... and religious factions here in the USA were very much responsible for the legislation. Ugandan officials expressed outrage at some of them for publicly decrying what they privately advocated.

Originally Posted by East

That letter is just the opinion of some ex gays...the effort in Uganada most certainly has US Political Ties...you can start with "THE FAMILY" and go from there...

[Only registered members can see links. ]

I have followed this from the beginning...way before they proposed the legislation. I can tell you that a handful of Conservative Republican Politicians...member of THE FAMILY... and religious factions here in the USA were very much responsible for the legislation. Ugandan officials expressed outrage at some of them for publicly decrying what they privately advocated.

So, since three Republicans are associated with "the Family", meaning, that they live in a row house on C St. they must, by all measures, be responsible for the legislation when even those who participated in the actual workshop have condemned it? Is that what you are telling me?

While it may be worth investigating, the fact that a large, well funded Fundamentalist group has ties to both the Republican Party and anti-gay politicians abroad does not surprise me in the least. I am afraid it would require more than a game of six-degrees of separation to convince me that these three representatives had anything to do with the Bills in Uganda. I don't accept Glenn Beck's conclusions when he plays that game. I wont accept it here either. In other words, if you have resources that indicate a direct and real connection between the two, I am interested. Until then, innocent until proven guilty (that is sadly something we have forgotten in this country).

Originally Posted by Inchante

So, since three Republicans are associated with "the Family", meaning, that they live in a row house on C St. they must, by all measures, be responsible for the legislation when even those who participated in the actual workshop have condemned it? Is that what you are telling me?

While it may be worth investigating, the fact that a large, well funded Fundamentalist group has ties to both the Republican Party and anti-gay politicians abroad does not surprise me in the least. I am afraid it would require more than a game of six-degrees of separation to convince me that these three representatives had anything to do with the Bills in Uganda. I don't accept Glenn Beck's conclusions when he plays that game. I wont accept it here either. In other words, if you have resources that indicate a direct and real connection between the two, I am interested. Until then, innocent until proven guilty (that is sadly something we have forgotten in this country).

No need to convince you. You are free to believe whatever you like. I have personally taken action to help prevent the legislation from being enacted...making phone calls and writing letters and emailing my Representatives and I have always contributed to Amnesty International...I would rather take action than philosophize about any similarity to Glenn Beck. I have taken an active interest since I was in High School as far as Human Rights Violations around the world and I read alot of information from alot of sources...I am convinced of the involvement of US Politicians and Clergy...you need not be convinced of anything. Perhaps you have followed it as closely as I and perhaps you have done what you can to fight the injustice as well and come to different conclusions..I don't know...but I do know you are entitled to your opinion and I have no desire to change it.

For anyone who is interested in what The Family is and their history in Uganda....

...an interview from 2009.....

[Only registered members can see links. ]

If you are so inclined you might want to read the book. It is always helpful to know who your enemies are.

EDIT: I do want to add this for anyone that is interested.....

[Only registered members can see links. ]

Originally Posted by East

No need to convince you. You are free to believe whatever you like. I have personally taken action to help prevent the legislation from being enacted...making phone calls and writing letters and emailing my Representatives and I have always contributed to Amnesty International...I would rather take action than philosophize about any similarity to Glenn Beck. I have taken an active interest since I was in High School as far as Human Rights Violations around the world and I read alot of information from alot of sources...I am convinced of the involvement of US Politicians and Clergy...you need not be convinced of anything. Perhaps you have followed it as closely as I and perhaps you have done what you can to fight the injustice as well and come to different conclusions..I don't know...but I do know you are entitled to your opinion and I have no desire to change it.

Right, so you can't produce evidence or a link to evidence that does make that connection. That is what you are telling me, and in the mean time, you will state that there is such a connection as long as there is no evidence otherwise. Do I have that right? That is fine if that is what you wish to do, personally, I would find that unconscionable no matter how much I may disagree with those individuals otherwise.

Philosophizing, no matter how some may disregard it, is actually how we got such things as law and an understanding of what human rights actually are. Believe it or not, the ideas of liberty, justice, equality etc. took over 200,000 years for humans to develop and begin to implement, so forgive me if I do not dismiss philosophizing as an idle and useless practice. Frankly, I think philosophy should be a required class in every school in the nation.

However, the merits and/or the drawbacks of philosophy are certainly not the point you were driving at. No, you were very politely and circuitously challenging my commitment "to the cause" because I don't instantly paint every person who stands against me as a demon. However, I can assure you that a full and honest list of my passed work would easily halt your challenge.

My stance that proof and logic is the surest way to truth is something I am uncompromising in even if at times I myself fail in its pursuit. I am aware that that stance makes me unpopular at times, but I think someone should still stand up for that antique bit of philosophy we call reason. Even when, and perhaps especially when it is inconvenient and inexpedient. That is what I am convinced of.

I have said everything I have to say. We are quite different.

Originally Posted by East

I have said everything I have to say. We are quite different.

Oh, I assure you, I am wholly aware that we are quite different, East. But difference is an asset. At least from my perspective.

[fredv3b]

Originally Posted by Inchante

So, you do not support Cameron's decision to limit aid to countries based on their human rights records? While food aid is a condition of many aspects of foreign assistance, it is not all. I would be willing to bet that medicine and food are not going to be the portion of aid cut for human rights violations. It is probably a question the citizens of Britain should look into. What aspects of aid would be cut and how much?

Personally, I don't think States should engage in charity. To take money off one with threat of force to just freely give to another, seems to me to be morally wrong.

However most foreign aid is not charity in its altruistic sense. Britain has many moral obligations stemming from our colonial past. One only has to look at Somalia to look at the cost of a failed state.

I don't see any reason why foreign aid should not come with reasonable strings, even if people are starving.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by Inchante

Oh, I assure you, I am wholly aware that we are quite different, East. But difference is an asset. At least from my perspective.

Difference certainly can be an asset....depends on the situation. I trust my opinion and conclusions on the matter.

[princealbertofb]

I've just listened to this great speech, so here is the link to the goverment website that publishes it in writing, should you want to read through some of it, or share some bits... or quotes.
[Only registered members can see links. ]